On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 11:39:49AM +0200, Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues
wrote:
> I was about to say that zdebootstrap by Adam Borowski used to be a thing four
> years ago but now I see another commit from two days ago so maybe it's still
> alive and usable?
>
>
Hi,
Quoting Thomas Goirand (2023-09-19 09:50:45)
> I'm not sure if we should switch to zstd, or if xz will do the work, though
> I'd be delighted if the dpkg performances could be improved. I'm spending all
> of my days installing server, sometimes with 1.5 TB of RAM and 128 core (AMD
> Epyc...),
On 9/16/23 07:01, Hideki Yamane wrote:
* So, if we change {data,control}.tar file format in .deb from xz to zst,
we can reduce package installation time than ever since less decompression
time. It saves our lifetime a bit :)
* Downside: package file size is a bit larger than now, but
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 4:20 PM Helmut Grohne wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Sep 16, 2023 at 10:31:20AM +0530, Hideki Yamane wrote:
> > Today I want to propose you to change default compression format in .deb,
> > {data,control}.tar."xz" to ."zst".
> >
> > I want to hear your thought about
Hi,
On Sat, Sep 16, 2023 at 10:31:20AM +0530, Hideki Yamane wrote:
> Today I want to propose you to change default compression format in .deb,
> {data,control}.tar."xz" to ."zst".
>
> I want to hear your thought about this.
I am not very enthusiastic about this idea. I skip over those
Hallo,
* Hideki Yamane [Sat, Sep 16 2023, 10:31:20AM]:
> Today I want to propose you to change default compression format in .deb,
> {data,control}.tar."xz" to ."zst".
I tend to agree but...
> # Compared to past change to xz proposal (in DebConf12)
>
> There are reasons why I propose this
On Sun, 2023-09-17 at 22:16 +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
>
> I do not think wasting space is any good idea.
>
> > ## More bandwidth
> > According to https://www.speedtest.net/global-index, broadband
> > bandwidth
> > in Nicaragua becomes almost 10x
>
> And elsewhere it may have gone up a
Stephan Verbücheln wrote...
> If you want to open that debate (again?), one should probably switch to
> lzip. It uses the same LZMA compression like xz, but has a way more
> sane file format.
Besides the fact dpkg already has zstd support while lzip is missing, so
that was a way bigger changes:
On 16988 March 1977, Hideki Yamane wrote:
Today I want to propose you to change default compression format in
.deb,
{data,control}.tar."xz" to ."zst".
I want to hear your thought about this.
Negative.
# Compared to past change to xz proposal (in DebConf12)
* More bandwidth
* More
If you want to open that debate (again?), one should probably switch to
lzip. It uses the same LZMA compression like xz, but has a way more
sane file format.
Also note that the (pretended) multi-threading-capability of xz is
mostly based on its improper file format[1]:
> The xz-utils manual says
On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 09:31:03AM +0530, Hideki Yamane wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Sep 2023 13:34:02 +0200
> Guillem Jover wrote:
> > That's not correct. dpkg-deb is doing multi-threaded xz decompression
> > since 1.21.13, and dpkg-source is doing multi-threaded xz compression
> > and decompression
On Sat, 16 Sep 2023 14:25:48 -0400
"M. Zhou" wrote:
> Be careful if it bloats up our mirrors. Is there any estimate on
> the extra space cost for a full debian mirror?
Yes, sure, I'll do some experiment for it later.
Thank you for your comment!
--
Hideki Yamane
On Sat, 16 Sep 2023 13:34:02 +0200
Guillem Jover wrote:
> That's not correct. dpkg-deb is doing multi-threaded xz decompression
> since 1.21.13, and dpkg-source is doing multi-threaded xz compression
> and decompression since 1.21.14.
>
> Also the Ubuntu zstd implementation did not have
Lee wrote:
> What did you do to get the "Performance counter stats" section in the
> results for time?
alias time="perf stat"
--
Robert Edmonds
edmo...@debian.org
On 9/16/23, Robert Edmonds wrote:
> $ time xz -v -k -T0 -6 data.tar
> data.tar (1/1)
> 100 %71.9 MiB / 452.5 MiB = 0.15921 MiB/s 0:21
>
> Performance counter stats for 'xz -v -k -T0 -6 data.tar':
>
> 206,070.39 msec task-clock #9.602 CPUs
>
M. Zhou wrote:
> Just one comment.
>
> Be careful if it bloats up our mirrors. Is there any estimate on
> the extra space cost for a full debian mirror?
>
> If we trade-off the disk space with decompression speed, zstd -19
> is not necessarily very fast. I did not benchmark, but it is slow.
Just one comment.
Be careful if it bloats up our mirrors. Is there any estimate on
the extra space cost for a full debian mirror?
If we trade-off the disk space with decompression speed, zstd -19
is not necessarily very fast. I did not benchmark, but it is slow.
On Sat, 2023-09-16 at 10:31
On Sat, Sep 16, 2023 at 10:31:20AM +0530, Hideki Yamane wrote:
> Today I want to propose you to change default compression format in .deb,
> {data,control}.tar."xz" to ."zst".
> According to https://www.speedtest.net/global-index, broadband bandwidth
> in Nicaragua becomes almost 10x
>
> -
Hi!
On Sat, 2023-09-16 at 10:31:20 +0530, Hideki Yamane wrote:
> ## More bandwidth
>
> According to https://www.speedtest.net/global-index, broadband bandwidth
> in Nicaragua becomes almost 10x
>
> - 2012: 1.7Mbps
> - 2023: 17.4Mbps
Well that page still does not look too great for many
I think it's a good idea now that dpkg supports it [1]. Ubuntu already
did it years ago [2], and some non-deb based distros as well (e.g.
Fedora, Arch).
Cheers,
Stephan
[1]: https://bugs.debian.org/892664
[2]: https://balintreczey.hu/blog/hello-zstd-compressed-debs-in-ubuntu/
Hi,
Today I want to propose you to change default compression format in .deb,
{data,control}.tar."xz" to ."zst".
I want to hear your thought about this.
# Compared to past change to xz proposal (in DebConf12)
There are reasons why I propose this
* More bandwidth
* More CPUs
* More
21 matches
Mail list logo
